The Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword Review

Skyward Sword is one of the most highly anticipated games this generation, a fitting swansong to an interesting era of gaming from Nintendo and its Wii console. The Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword is finally here for the masses, bringing with it claims of perfect 1:1 sword-play, an epic quest and a new take on the familiar Zelda experience. Expectations were at an all-time high, particularly with the re-release of Ocarina of Time earlier this year, which has been long heralded as the greatest game of all time.

Skyward Sword not only meets all of those expectations, but creates a gaming experience that has not only reinvigorated an ageing series, but set a standard for what Nintendo can achieve with motion controls, story and fantastic art styles.

What Skyward Sword Got Right

Origin story - The Zelda timeline is a whole kettle of fish that we won't get into right now, but Skyward Sword is our first look at an origin story for the series. Preceding the events of Ocarina of Time, we are introduced to Skyloft; a group of islands in the clouds created by a Goddess to protect a powerful item from the Demon King Demise. Many generations later after the creation of Skyloft, players take control of Link who is sent on a epic quest to "the surface" where he must fulfill his destiny with Zelda and stop the Demon King who has resurfaced to take over Skyloft and discover the item of great power. A fitting story that takes an in-depth look at the origins of many Zelda staples, such as The Master Sword, Ganon and the Triforce. This feels like the definitive beginning of the franchise, adding weight to every journey we've been on before, and setting a precedent for every journey we will embark on in the future.

Keeping with Zelda tradition, the game is devoid of voice actors to allow the player to immerse themselves as the characters. Despite the lack of dialogue, Skyward Sword is by far the most cinematic experience that Nintendo has ever created, offering an emotional connection to the characters and their stories unlike any other Zelda title before. The tension between Zelda and Link at the beginning of the game plays out like some kind of John Hughes film, allowing the player to feel a range of emotions as the story unfolds. Anyone who doubts Nintendo's ability to craft a cinematic experience will think twice after playing through Skyward Sword.

True arrival of motion gaming - The Nintendo Wii may have started the motion gaming craze, but Skyward Sword is when it truly arrives. Using the MotionPlus attachment the player has true 1:1 control over Link's sword, along with many of his items. Not only does this make combat satisfying, but it truly immerses the player into the gameplay. Never before has a gaming experience delivered pitch perfect motion control, but Skyward Sword does it with style. This is how a Zelda game should be played, and after going back to play Twilight Princess after some playtime with Skyward Sword I simply cannot imagine a Zelda game without this level of motion control ever again. This is the true definition of what motion controls should be in gaming.

New take on familiar ground - Skyward Sword feels like a different kind of Zelda title than its predecessors, relying heavily on open areas to provide gameplay and quests rather than solely dungeon exploration. Players will find that more side quests, combat and items are waiting to be found in the areas in between dungeons, which makes for some exciting gameplay.

Dungeon and puzzle design has been revamped to suit the new gameplay mechanics and motion controls to offer a robust experience. The development team has borrowed from every successful Zelda title and created something that truly feels unique, offers unprecedented challenge, yet still manages to feel accessible at the same time. Whether you are a hardcore Zelda fan or a casual player, you'll find something familiar, something new and something enjoyable in this epic adventure.

Satisfying combat - Nothing comes close to the satisfaction of the combat in Skyward Sword. That's a big claim, but I believe it to be the absolute truth. Enemies will dynamically block sword strokes which means you will need to pay attention, learn to counter their attacks and how to strike effectively. Precise 1:1 motion makes this possible, allowing you to slice in any direction, or even thrust your sword straight forward to land a blow. Every enemy you defeat leaves a smile on your face, almost like a small personal victory. After those first few battles, you won't be able to put this down.

Orchestral delight - A standout feature of the entire Zelda series has been the amazing soundtracks, and Skyward Sword keeps that tradition alive and kicking. The soundtrack is warm and charming one second, then full of urgency and desparation the next. There is a great mix of new and old anthems here that will be stuck in your head long after your session is over. It's big, it's epic and it's full of orchestral sounds.

Gorgeous art style - Trailers and gameplay footage simply don't do the unique art style of Skyward Sword any justice. Playing on a good TV with component cables will bring the game to life, like a breathing painting on your screen. A great use of colour and a mixture of serious and playful character and environment design makes this stand out not only for a Wii title, but as one of the best looking games of 2011.

What Skyward Sword Got Wrong

Z-Targeting can be frustrating - I'm nit-picking here, but on occasion the Z-Targeting system can be a little frustrating during some battles. If surrounded by enemies it will target the closest threat, but once you knock that enemy on his back it will change to the closest enemy rather than allowing you to land a fatal strike at times. It doesn't happen often, but it does happen.

Back tracking - With more emphasis on the open areas rather than finding dungeons, you will do a fair amount of back tracking as your quest unfolds. This is fine considering the size of the areas, and the amount of side quests available. What doesn't bode well is when you have to go through the same dungeon three times to complete a certain side quest. Once again this is an extremely minor gripe, particularly considering it is an optional endeavour.

The Final Verdict

The Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword is as close to perfection as we are going to get this generation. The combat is beyond satisfying, with each battle unfolding like strategic game of chess, just waiting for someone to take advantage of a missed opportunity. The controls set a benchmark for motion control, proving once and for all that if used correctly, it can not only enhance an experience, but create an unforgettable experience. The origin story brings a lot of weight to the franchise, and Nintendo's cinematic approach proves that they are masters in their field. Some people won't agree with the review, and feel that 10 out of 10 should be reserved for a game that is perfect, yet I disagree. The Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword, despite its minute flaws, provides a simply stunning and unforgettable experience that transcends this generation of gaming and lifts the highly regarded franchise into a whole new league. This is as close to perfect as we are ever going to get.

The Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword Review Comments

Wow, 10/10 [WTF] I watched my brother playing this and it certainly didn't look like a game I'd enjoy, it just looked annoyingly hand-holding and kid-sy. Nice review though. Queue self-righteous Ninty fans?

That's a fair call @tommo47 the opening areas can definitely feel a little like that, but it certainly ramps up! Also when you finish the game you unlock Hero mode, where each enemy does 20% more damage.

Great game, and my pick for Game of The Year. You either get the charm of Zelda or you don't IMO, and it's not a game to watch or play a bit of. You need to commit and see it through or you won't get it.

As I said in the thread, my only real complaint is it does overuse motion for the hell of it. Combat is awesome, and it works well for everything, but flying your loftwing (bird thing) would have been just as good and a million times easier with the control stick instead. MotionPlus makes it just as accurate, but it isn't better than just using the control stick and buttons like combat is.

Nintendo probably still haven't worked out how to use the motion well in conjunction with tradition controls. This is close, but the balance is not quite right. Pretty much sums up the Wii.

Heller said: That's a fair call @tommo47 the opening areas can definitely feel a little like that, but it certainly ramps up! Also when you finish the game you unlock Hero mode, where each enemy does 20% more damage.

10/10 on everything? seriously? it's that good? it don't look that good and im a massive Zelda fan... worth buying a Wii for?
There's no real exploration though is there like in OoT? the fields and such?

Dicky said: Good review, i sense a bit of a Zelda fanboy here though...
10/10 on everything? seriously? it's that good? it don't look that good and im a massive Zelda fan... worth buying a Wii for?
There's no real exploration though is there like in OoT? the fields and such?

any exploration in OoT in fields is illusion. lets not pretend its filled with life. Hyrule field is pretty full of nothing. in my personally opinion, hyrule field is no less a world hub than the sky apparently is to Skyward Sword. Oh, except stuff actually happens in the Sky while flying around.

I will use Zoras river/domain or lake hylia as an example compared to skyward sword. In OoT of time, getting to dungeons was mostly a matter of point A to point B. Skyward Sword is not like this. In pretty much every instance, you are traversing the environment, finding the right path, and solving minor problems just to get in to them.

temples arent just 'that place with that medallion you need to beat the game' each one has story, and as you visit each area, there's already a kind of history with the pre existing races on the surface. Its a nice world.

Heller said: For the power of the system they have excelled in all areas.

This is getting in to dangerous territory; the power of a system should be irrelevant IMO. A game should not be judged on how close it was to pushing the boundaries on the system. I understand the point being made, that the game has no right to be possible on the Wii, but what if it was on a different console? Could it have had better graphics? Less clipping issues? Better sound quality/depth? Tighter control scheme? I wouldn't know since, as I said, I haven't played it.

If anything could have been made better by being on a different console, is it fair to award a 10 still? You're effectively awarding such a score because the hardware design was compromised, in that scenario.

eltoNNNNNN said: nice review. I haven't played it yet & I'm not sure about the sound as a 10. I've heard a lot of it's music. definitely a 9 minimum though.

Heller said: For the power of the system they have excelled in all areas.

This is getting in to dangerous territory; the power of a system should be irrelevant IMO. A game should not be judged on how close it was to pushing the boundaries on the system. I understand the point being made, that the game has no right to be possible on the Wii, but what if it was on a different console? Could it have had better graphics? Less clipping issues? Better sound quality/depth? Tighter control scheme? I wouldn't know since, as I said, I haven't played it.
If anything could have been made better by being on a different console, is it fair to award a 10 still? You're effectively awarding such a score because the hardware design was compromised, in that scenario.

eltoNNNNNN said: nice review. I haven't played it yet & I'm not sure about the sound as a 10. I've heard a lot of it's music. definitely a 9 minimum though.

Why is it "definitely a 9 minimum"? You haven't played it?

So no PS3/360 games should be 10/10 graphics either seeing as PC is superior?

Exactly @blob however I see where @tommo47 is coming from. I would like to clarify that regardless if this was on the PS3 or Xbox 360 it still would have received a 10. I'm merely saying that Nintendo played to its strengths considering the hardware.

The graphical style just suits the subject matter, and sure it may look crisper on other hardware but you can't punish a game for that. There is a difference between bad graphics and limitations and Skyward Sword certainly doesn't look bad by any stretch of the imagination.

It would be like saying Sly Racoon is a bad game because it is cell shaded, therefore the graphics are bad.

personally, i do not think graphics should be a legitimate category in games. it does not in any way define the experience, unless it is intentionally one of those that fall under 'cinematic gaming' (see Uncharted)

it should be replaced with context and atmosphere, because a game does not need to LOOK realistic for it to feel amazing, and be more immersive than something that has better 'graphics'.

Totally agree @Rivalz personally I'd love to just ditch all the categories here at MMGN and just give one defining, numerical score for the entire game. Elements either work together or they don't to make a good or bad experience. I think people rely too heavily on "are the graphics good" "is the audio good". It's should be a rating on the experience as a whole and whether it works or doesn't.

Can you imagine Mario working with the CryEngine 3? it just would not suit that type of game.

Heller said:
It would be like saying Sly Racoon is a bad game because it is cell shaded, therefore the graphics are bad.

With all due respect good sir, it's not like saying that at all. I understand the art style Nintendo went for and that's fine. I'm not saying the art style for SS is so bad it should stop the game getting whatever mark someone sees fit. If Sly Raccoon went cel-shaded, it should be judged for being cel-shaded. The bigger issue is, if I'm playing it on PS2 and there are massive screen tears, and the game gets a 10 because it is as good as can be done on PS2.

blob said:
So no PS3/360 games should be 10/10 graphics either seeing as PC is superior?

Depends on the context of the review, the art style, how it complements the experience. I wasn't jumping on SS saying it doesn't deserve 10/10 for graphics. I was pointing out that it is a double standard to judge a game's graphics against what a system is capable of.

Let's say a game is released on both X360 and PS3. The graphics are noticeably better on the PS3. Does the X360 get marked down because it is an older console? Or should they both get the same mark?

Heller said: Totally agree @Rivalz personally I'd love to just ditch all the categories here at MMGN and just give one defining, numerical score for the entire game. Elements either work together or they don't to make a good or bad experience. I think people rely too heavily on "are the graphics good" "is the audio good". It's should be a rating on the experience as a whole and whether it works or doesn't.
Can you imagine Mario working with the CryEngine 3? it just would not suit that type of game.

Heller said: Totally agree @Rivalz personally I'd love to just ditch all the categories here at MMGN and just give one defining, numerical score for the entire game. Elements either work together or they don't to make a good or bad experience. I think people rely too heavily on "are the graphics good" "is the audio good". It's should be a rating on the experience as a whole and whether it works or doesn't.

Different strokes for different folks. Some people are graphics whores. Some people enjoy spending $400 every few years or so on a new GPU/CPU for bleeding edge graphics, just like some people are audiophiles. To some people, game play is second fiddle to the cinematics, to some people, sound design is the be all, end all - just ask DICE. By removing these categories you run the risk of becoming vague in your reviews. At the very least, you would alienate a lot of readers who want to know more about the particulars of their favourite series.

Ben said: You have to consider the system to an extent.
Should 3DS games be compared to PC?

Of course there is an extent. But is a 3DS the same type of console as a gaming PC? Considering the Wii, X360 and PS3 were all released, what, 12 months apart? 18? They all had relatively equal opportunity to adopt similar hardwares. Nintendo made their design choice, they made plenty of people happy with motion control, but I still don't think its correct to drop your standards to what the console can provide.

Again, I'm not saying this directly in relation to SS, or the review, just the comment I quoted earlier; it's a dangerous stance to take.

Ben said: You have to consider the system to an extent.
Should 3DS games be compared to PC?

Of course there is an extent. But is a 3DS the same type of console as a gaming PC? Considering the Wii, X360 and PS3 were all released, what, 12 months apart? 18? They all had relatively equal opportunity to adopt similar hardwares. Nintendo made their design choice, they made plenty of people happy with motion control, but I still don't think its correct to drop your standards to what the console can provide.
Again, I'm not saying this directly in relation to SS, or the review, just the comment I quoted earlier; it's a dangerous stance to take.

I would say the Wii is not competing with the PS3, 360 and PC then.

They are all HD and it's SD. So IMO you can compare those three against each other, but not the Wii.

E: FYI only taking visuals here. Everything else can be compared. Gameplay on the Wii should be critiqued against everything else.

Yeah agreed it is a dangerous stance @tommo47 but that was not that case in SS - it deserves the 10/10 regardless of platform.

Of course if a cross-platform game is released for PS3/360 and one looks better than the other, the score will be marked down. I'd expect the same to happen to the wii version of a game if that was the case too.

But exclusives are played out for the console they are built on and that is why the Wii exclusives have truly shined this generation.

I hate the term "it's great....for a Wii game.". I tend to review based mostly on experience, and if there is a significant downgrade in graphics, audio, controls or other element on one console over another, then I will mention that and mark accordingly.

However in terms of SS it will never be on another console, so we won't have to worry about that.

Ben said:
I would say the Wii is not competing with the PS3, 360 and PC then.
They are all HD and it's SD. So IMO you can compare those three against each other, but not the Wii.
E: FYI only taking visuals here. Everything else can be compared. Gameplay on the Wii should be critiqued against everything else.

Then how can you compare Move/Kinect with the Wii? One was the main focal point for a console's entire R&D cycle, one was a decision made well into the console's life cycle. All of the big three had their opportunities to go HD/SD/Motion/Linear. It's not like a 10 year old console here..
Just my opinion ;)

Heller said: Yeah agreed it is a dangerous stance @tommo47 but that was not that case in SS - it deserves the 10/10 regardless of platform.

If you're happy to say that, I'm happy to agree.

However in terms of SS it will never be on another console, so we won't have to worry about that.

I personally didn't mind the backtracking though, because alot of the time when you had to backtrack it usually ended up with you being rewarded with finding a new area/dungeon, or even just going through the same area in a new light with a few things changed around to bring it up a notch.

A good example would be in the second half of the game, when you have to explore Edin Volcano again, but have to work around the obstacles and retrieve your items to help you get back up to the top. I do see where you're coming from though.

This is just my personal opinion, but I just can't believe that you can give this a perfect score if you've found faults in the game. It doesn't quite add up to me. You say that it "got stuff wrong" so by default it can't be a perfect game, and 10/10 is perfect. Sorry, just doesn't make sense to me. Great review by the way, I think I might bother to play this.

Snix said: This is just my personal opinion, but I just can't believe that you can give this a perfect score if you've found faults in the game. It doesn't quite add up to me. You say that it "got stuff wrong" so by default it can't be a perfect game, and 10/10 is perfect. Sorry, just doesn't make sense to me. Great review by the way, I think I might bother to play this.

10 out of 10 is not 'perfect' - there is no such thing in video games, and any reviewer will tell you that you can't paint a product is perfect. 10 out of 10 is basically saying "recommended for everyone"

Nice review, and I really don't understand why people are angry about the review (not just on this site, but on others as well). It's Zelda, it looks great, it plays great, it sounds great, it's Zelda. Not much to say here; we all know it'll be quality, and the real question is just how much better than the previous games it is.

No game is perfect. None. The reason no game is perfect is because, unlike things such as a perfect sphere that are easily defined as perfect, things such as games are perfect in the eye of the beholder. Is the original SMB perfect? Well, someone might think that one Goomba's placement is off by a pixel; it's not perfect anymore. What about Little Big Planet 2? Well, there was a texture pop-in this one ti- it's not perfect. And of course, if there's a certain part of the game you like any less than the rest of the game, any less at all, the game isn't perfect. These things may seem like nitpicks, but if you're really looking for the "perfect game", it has to meet meaningless standards like this.

And finally, a game will get a 10/10 in the graphics or music department depending on what it tried to achieve. The graphics score in SS is based on the art style, which, unlike realistic graphics, would look exactly the same (just at a higher resolution) on other consoles or the PC. Music is the same thing; Nintendo didn't set out to completely change the music, and instead reworked it. Therefore you can't fault them for that, unless it makes the game worse; you can't go off and state that, for no reason at all, you wish they'd added new sound effects.

Oh, and the gameplay would actually be worse on other consoles; the Kinect would lag for around half a second for each slice/movement, and the Move would lag as well, just not nearly as bad as the Kinect. I can see a similar game coming to the Move (a swordfighting game, like that one in Sports Champions), but, ironically, it would be technologically superior on the Wii. :P

Froggy said: 10/10
i thought these reviews where meant to be impartial
but your not going to change it so im not going to rabbit on
i will just say now i will seriously be considering the integrity of all your other reviews

If you want to question the integrity of my other work then that's fine by me. Why is it so hard to accept that this game is simply exceptional? I had the balls to give Battlefield 3 a lower score than most sites were giving. I gave Dead Rising 2: Off The Record a low score also. Why? Because they deserved it. This deserves 10/10 whole heartedly. The minor flaws I pointed out were simply nitpicking, they do not detract from the experience, but then people would be complaining if I didn't point out anything that could be improved.

There is no such thing as a perfect book, game, movie or album but plenty of movies still get 5 stars. This is so close to perfection it deserves a 10.

Would you be happier if I gave Call of Duty a 10/10?

I gave the game a review and score that I felt was worthy of the product. If any other game comes across my desk that gets this much right, and offers such an experience, then it too will get a 10/10.

I did not give this score lightly - it is only the second 10/10 score that MMGN has ever given. This review was thought out and written with care. We don't just hand out this prestigious score to any game that walks through the door.

I'm not trying to sound angry or pretentious because I'm not, I believe in this review and I'll stick by it. I'm merely explaining that this wasn't a light decision, nor was it awarded 10/10 because it was a just another Zelda game.

The simple comparison is movies. Heaps of movies get 5 stars (more than games that get 10s) and they have some faults if you look for them. But the experience is about as good as it gets, so therefore it deserves the highest possible rating.

Same with games. The experience doesn't get any better, therefore it deserves the perfect score. Doesn't mean every little aspect is actually perfect.

That's how we score games though, and why only two have ever gotten 10/10. Other publications might want to only give them to a game that is absolutely perfect, so they have never done it, and others again might give them out more freely.

The scoring system generally is subjective. You should never really compare between sites or even reviewers.

Heller said:
If you want to question the ............ another Zelda game.

first I must apologies did not mean to take a stab at your work other factors affecting my mood where at play yesterday

secondly
i did not communicate my point properly
i would not be happy if cod or battlefield got a 10/10 each for MANY of there own reasons
my point was in a scoring system there has to be a score like @harry said that "appeals to everyone" but by the very nature that makes us human that is impossible to achieve thus the score should never be achievable, if you then compromise this score and bring it down from "perfect" then what bridges the gap, what's the range between your 10 and perfect and what about all the games that could potently fit in here ?

To be honest I can't think of anything this generation tha could fit into that except SMG 2 and SS. I also think scoring in general is messed up which is why you'll see lower scores from me than most publications out there. The whole mentality that 75% is a bad score and that 10/10 means it must be the perfect game is stupid in my eyes.

10/10 is a big thing and not to be given lightly, but we shouldn't be scared of giving 5,6 or 7s.

Don't worry @Heller its a damn fine review and thats what matters. If you see an all 10 outta 10 game then you rate it as that i wouldn't want it any other way.
People (including myself) will agree and disagree thats life, i think @froggy was a little harsh above though even with the semi apology. I've never questioned any of your reviews, i may have disagreed with a few scores but your not usually far off.

in relation to tommos earlier comments, i think you should score relative to the console. It's like discrediting Uncharted's graphics because they are good, but they 'could' be better. Probably not on the current tech but they are still not the best graphics humanly possible. If it is as good as possible on the tech then it does deserve the highest possible score(in the graphics department). 'Good as possible' including art style, vibrancy, etc.

Marge said: in relation to tommos earlier comments, i think you should score relative to the console. It's like discrediting Uncharted's graphics because they are good, but they 'could' be better. Probably not on the current tech but they are still not the best graphics humanly possible. If it is as good as possible on the tech then it does deserve the highest possible score(in the graphics department). 'Good as possible' including art style, vibrancy, etc.

Why should it be relative to a console? Given the game was developed by Nintendo, it's like reviewing a film, relative to the camera used.
Extremely extreme example: "The movie looked like shit, but it was filmed on a HandyCam so 10/10 for Visuals."

Now again, I'm not saying SS looks like shit. I'm not even saying this in regard to this review in general. Once you stop subjectively comparing things across genres/platforms/etc, you are no longer an industry critic.

Yes, there are obvious limits put in place. Nobody expects a Wii game to match a PC game in the visual department. But if a Wii game is going for realistic graphics/textures/models, I could never understand someone giving that game 10 for Visuals. The art style of SS is one that doesn't need more grunt to be successful. Heller can justify giving it 10 and while I don't like the art style, I understand his justification. I just find it indulgent to give a game a 10 for a category on the basis the machine couldn't do it better.

Another extreme example to end. Should every NES game ever made should get a 10 for graphics?

Heller said: Basically I see it as this
Exclusive games should be judged based on the hardware they are presented on, for the fact we'll never see if on other hardware, therefore you can't punish it for how it MAY look on another console.
Cross platform should all be judged on their own merits.

tommo47 said:
Another extreme example to end. Should every NES game ever made should get a 10 for graphics?

At the same time, we can't have the graphical score of every other game 6- simply because the graphics aren't as good as they would be on future technology. The only system that makes sense is making it relative to the console. Making scores relative to time means every console game gets lower scores because PC's are capable of more.

barters81 said: I soon as I saw the "What went wrong" part of the review, and saw that the score was a 10/10 I figured this was written with a little too much emotional love for the boy in green.
That said, I love Zelda too and will surely get right into this game. After I finish with Skyrim....and Mario 3d, and did I mention finishing with Skyrim?

All games will get something wrong, or have something you don't like. Even the best job, or your favourite job will have one thing you don't like.

If it doesn't take away from the good though, as in, they're so minor it doesn't make a difference, why should it not be given a perfect score if your opinion of the game would not be different?

Heller pointed out things wrong with it (one of whch I'm not sure he even noticed until i pointed it out) because this is a review. He was obligated to be critical on all components of the game, and give his opinion. Which means, if something bugs him,(like only a few times in the whole game) well he should point it out but just because he feels obligated to point out something like that, does not mean he enjoyed the game any less, or would have enjoyed it any more.

WOW I think @Heller you have lost your mind, i mean realy you give this 10 out 10 my god i understand that you love this game and a massive fan of the Wii but i mean to say this is better than Batman, Uncharted 3, Skyrim man r u serious my 12 year old sister was a massive fan of Zelda before this and she thinks it sucks me i would not touch this if you gave it to me, so please review a game on its worth and not what you love

Bayonetta said: my 12 year old sister was a massive fan of Zelda before this and she thinks it sucks me i would not touch this if you gave it to me, so please review a game on its worth and not what you love

Oh god.

Another one... I swear there's more people whinging about fanboys than actual fanboys.

Bayonetta said: you give this 10 out 10 my god i understand that you love this game and a massive fan of the Wii but i mean to say this is better than Batman, Uncharted 3, Skyrim

he didn't say that. He just found it more enjoyable, which scores are most the time a scale of. Would it be a surprise to you that the most loved gaming experience ever (zelda games) is actually an enjoyable experience? Or that it is enjoyed thoroughly by many people including reviewers?

You have clearly been raised to think only shooters and MA15+ games can be good ... poor you :(

Dr_Mario said: This game has too many scenes, it gets in the way of the gameplay, what happened to games like oot where you had to figure it all out yourself, games are becoming way too "handholding" in my opinion.